ATAR Notes: Forum
General Discussion => General Discussion Boards => Rants and Debate => Topic started by: Stick on December 16, 2011, 05:41:40 pm
-
This is more of a rant than a debate, but feel free to comment. I don't intend to insult anyone, but people may find themselves offended. If you do feel hurt or angered by my comments, I apologise. You can probably detect a frustrated tone in my words. I feel like I just need to get this off my chest.
-----
Back when my father was at high school, he just went to the local state school. While he was there, he was exposed to a lot of different students with different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, as well as varying (although overall, below average) academic abilities. My dad, although not the smartest of students, was an incredibly hard worker and had a desire for a more prosperous future. He ended up being the school's dux and was one of the few students from that school to ever go to Melbourne University.
He's always told me that it did not matter where I went to school - as long as I wanted to do well, I'd do well wherever I went. My mother, on the other hand, who attended a private school (and was not very academic), was very keen to send me to an 'elite' school. After many months of squabbling about 'my parents' investment in my education' and touring many of the best schools in Melbourne, my parents both felt the local private boy's school was the best choice - a happy medium between my parents' experiences. Most of the boys from my local primary school were going there as well.
I go to a fairly modest school. It is certainly not an elite school, by any standards. Most year levels here start off with about 200 students, with eight classes of approximately 25 students in each. When we get to Years 11 and 12, about a quarter of the students elect to undertake the VCAL program and the rest of us do VCE. We're not well-known for our academic excellence - we only get about 20 students each year who get an ATAR of 90 or above. Our school is further humbled by the presence of many other elite private schools in the area. Many of my peers tend to blame the teachers or the school itself for their poor academic success, despite it usually being their own fault. My friends' parents have also threatened them that if they fail to perform well academically at this school, that they will be moved to a more elite school. Other than the usual 5 or 6 boys who sit the Melbourne High exam and pass, most students who leave our school expect their new school will be the solution to all their academic problems. It's as if the students feel they have to live out the reputation of their school - 'my school's crap, my education will be crap so I might as well do crap while I'm here'.
I've always believed that every teacher is more or less the same wherever you go. I know personally that there are certainly bad teachers out there - trust me, I've had a few over the years myself. But they all have similar qualifications and the school they teach at is not determined by their ability; in most cases the school they work at is close to home or it was the school they attended when they were younger. So why do people believe that certain schools will guarantee academic success, while others will not? A lot of these elite schools seem to gear themselves towards VCE success by 'poaching' talent away from other schools. We credit certain schools for their high quality of education when they merely lure achieving students in the form of scholarships and kick out underachieving students. Each year at my school, we get a major intake of students in Year 11 who were told to leave their school because they were underachieving. We also lose several kids with genuine academic or sporting talent to elite schools - one boy was offered a scholarship which he didn't even apply for (he took it anyway). This swap of students is what gives a school its reputation and parents, wanting the best quality of education for their child, often gravitate to these pseudo-reputations.
It's all very easy to say this now while I'm on my high horse, but I used to feel as if my school was bad as well. I was determined to get out of my 'hell hole' by the end of Year 7. I told my parents in no uncertain terms that I wanted to sit the Melbourne High exam, so they got me heaps of tutors to help me out. As the exam was approaching, however, I began to have second thoughts about how I felt about my school. It had all the services and facilities that any student would ever need - it was only its 'reputation' that was bothering me. I sat the exam anyway and I was still over the moon when I got the email of acceptance, but after a lengthy period of thought, both my parents and I agreed that it would be best for me to stay at my current school. Could it have been one of the stupidest decisions ever? Potentially. But I don't regret it one little bit. Because I want to show my cohort and the future students who walk past the gates of my high school that reputation doesn't matter. If you want to succeed, you will succeed no matter where you go.
Why do schools feel the need to obtain VCE success by taking talent away from other places, rather than honestly educate their students to the supposed high standard of education they boast to offer? And why are parents so eager to follow these trends? If schools did not 'swap' their students around, we would clearly see a far more level playing field.
-
I don't think it's largely about the teachers and facilities and whatnot, but rather the types of people you're around. I believe that VCE largely comes down to motivation rather than 'intelligence' (a term I use loosely). Of course it helps, but I think one can succeed in many VCE subjects by compensating 'intelligence' with motivation and hard work. So what happens is that many students will more or less emulate the level of achievement of those around them. If you study too hard in a poor performing school, you're often looked down upon by others, hence lowering your motivation. The reverse can apply to other schools, hence increasing motivation to study. If someone has an internal drive for motivation though, they can succeed where ever they are as we can see from the several very high performing students from poor performing schools that come up every year. Problem is the large majority of people don't have this internal motivation to study, and that's the advantage of pooling students together in these selective schools.
The other way of looking at it is the fact that yes, if selective/private schools didn't poach all the high achievers, they would help to create a more level playing field somehow. I actually don't believe this would help much at all (more likely scenario is that the 'smart' kid would more likely get pulled down by the others, rather than the others get pulled up), but going by the assumption that it does, the fact remains is that people are inherently going to look out for themselves. Hence, not enough people will take the hit to stay at their local public school to improve it. It's just human nature really.
-
Some students choose (or rather their parents choose) to attend private schools because the students generally have a good work ethic (generally because 'bad' students are kicked out). By being surrounded by such students you can be more motivated to do well and be less distracted. Also, although it isn't always the case, often you will have better teachers at a private school because they are attracted to such schools due to larger incomes and/or the same prestige as students.
It can also aid academically if things such as SAC scaling.
e.g. you are rank one in a strong cohort, you stuff up your Exam (your exam mark isn't top mark, so rely on someone else's), you get the no. 1 Exam mark which is good as your SAC mark. On the other hand rank one is a weak cohort, you stuff up your Exam(your exam mark isn't top mark, so rely on someone else's), you get the no.1 Exam mark which is bad as your SAC mark. Overall your study score will be lower in the weak cohort. Unlikely situation but still possible.
Most of this comes about from things of the past where underachieving students are asked to leave these top schools and students who are academically talented are offered scholarships and what not.
If, one day, I become a parent and my child is highly intellectual and is willing to be in such an environment, I would be happy to let them. But I think the student should be able to have opinion on the decision of which school they wish to be at, despite age.
-
Mhm, before I attended Melbourne High, I was among a rather low-tier public school. The difference in the environment and the quality of people you meet is tremendous to say the least. If I stayed at my old school, I would, most certainly, have lacked motivation or think I was already the best that there ever could be. Once you experience other environments however, you notice that your intelligence compares dismally against other intellectuals.
Also, a lot of the people at my old school find a 90 atar a huge achievement, whilst, not trying to be an elitist, people at MHS will think 99+ is the achievement to attain. Not only this, there are a greater number of smokers, drug users, those who do not respect society or themselves at the lower end schools than the elite ones.
Thus, the environment you are subjected to changes your attitude to life and study as well. Additionally, a lot of high tier schools will have a proper school spirit and ethos that can be properly felt by the students, whereas at my time at my former school, such a thing wouldn't even exist.
Having friends that are hardworkers and intelligent is of a paramount importance and these are also found at the higher end schools. If not for them, I would not be where I am today.
This is how I see why higher ranked schools are more beneficial than the others.
And yes, it is possible to do very well by yourself at a lower end school, but these cases are rare such as yourself.
-
yes, going to Macrob/MHS would be great, but I think the pressure would be huge.
It's bad enough already: I know at some school some kids pick on others, and make them feel insecure, saying stuff like:' You know (insert name here) did 4 Methods practise exams and only got 1 thing wrong in total?" Which is really mean. I'm not saying that this happens at elite schools, as I don't attend one, but it sure happens at mine. :(
anyway, we should be like max payne: it is really up to the student more than the teacher.
s.
-
Well, to use anecdotal evidence, my school is non-selective and stingy with scholarships, yet consistently gets amazingly high scores. It's not so much that it "poaches" students, but rather, people who care enough are compelled to enrol in schools like mine. There's no tests to get in, no one gets kicked out for having low grades.
Like others have said, the people and atmosphere make a big difference.
-
I don't know why, but I've always had a soft-spot in my heart for public schools, maybe because it's that I've always been to a public school!
I don't like the really competitive atmosphere of some schools, I like my school cause it's competitive ut not extreme. Had I gone to somewhere like MHS, I would probably felt the need to place greater pressure on myself to do well (less facebook, not have a girlfriend, less going out...etc.) which isn't necessarily a good thing.
-
There is always a percieved notion that kids in private schools excel more then kids in public schools. When parents are blasted with private school advertising coupled with media reports about how private school students excel in comparison to their public school peers. There is a sort of pressure to give their child the best. I mean my old school, which was a private school basically had ads at the airport. It's more of an advertising and marketing gimmick which influences people's decision to send their child to a private school. If they hear from one their friends " oh my child did so well and he went to this elite school called ........". Then this sort of word-to-mouth communication will surely have an impact on a parent mind.It causes them to think and evaluate their child/children's education. "Are they really being offered the best education at their current school".
-
Well, to use anecdotal evidence, my school is non-selective and stingy with scholarships, yet consistently gets amazingly high scores. It's not so much that it "poaches" students, but rather, people who care enough are compelled to enrol in schools like mine. There's no tests to get in, no one gets kicked out for having low grades.
Like others have said, the people and atmosphere make a big difference.
Umm Funky, you go to PLC. The thing about PL is, it is highly selective (not on grades) because the cost is friggen ridiculous. This creates an environment where parents are not only able to afford extra help, but can guilt trip their children into taking it and succeeding because they are spending so much money.
I go to De La Salle and to be honest Stick, it sounds a lot like your school. I am proud to have gone to my school and I am proud of what I have achieved.
-
How are the fees at DLS ? I thought they were quite high?
They're slightly less than 7 thousand a year.
Compared to:
St. Kevins $13,150
Xavier $16,298 + $1,100
PLC $22,136
Siena $7577
Sacre Coeur $15,859
To name a few
-
Honestly, some times I find Private education a bit of a laugh.
I went to a public school, I got 98.45 ATAR with only 5 subjects in total.
What did I pay:
$3.50 for my local library card, borrowed books when I needed them to supplement my textbooks and teachers.
What did I do?
Motivated MYSELF, parents didn't care about school. Read the textbook and taught myself.
Private school:
Little bit better ATAR (let's assume 99.5).
What did they pay:
~200k over the course of their education on uniforms textbooks etc.
What did they do?
Get PhD teachers to explain to them what I read for $3.50 from my local library.
I honestly laugh at them, it's like parents are insecure and doubt their kids abilities so they give them overqualified teachers to compensate. Anybody who actually thinks their kids are intelligent and hard-working on their own wouldn't bother with private school expenses.
-
Congratulations on your results.
Whether or not you need a private school to do well is debatable, but private schools offer a better environment (both academic and otherwise) than public schools and saying otherwise is just willfully deluding yourself.
-
Russ, I disagree, private schools are more uniform, in that most of them do relatively well whereas public schools fluctuate, there are some who do really well and some who do really crap, the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.
But the truth is how much the better environment can help one succeed.
-
Better environment?
Academically, it inclines you to study. Why is this a good thing? We have loads and loads of people being pushed to study and enter Commerce amongst other 'prestigious' professions(look at the stats of Scotch and Commerce).
I personally think, if someone wants to study, they should study. They should not be influenced by external factors such as parents or school. If you truly want to succeed academically, you will. If can't transcend the difference of whether the kid next to you is studying or playing on his phone, as far as I'm concerned, you didn't want that place at university bad enough.
At my school, more or less everyone wants to study what they actually like.
We have many kids wanting to be athletes, rock musicians and tradies. They all pursue there interests.
Is there some freakish interest amongst Scotch students whereby 80% suddenly WANT to study Commerce. Please, parents and school pushing them for prestige and crap like that.
-
the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.
Compare the average and it's a different picture. The "best" public schools are well above the rest of the public schools and it's not a good comparison to make.
We have many kids wanting to be athletes, rock musicians and tradies. They all pursue there interests.
Great. This has nothing to do with students succeeding academically at public schools though. If parents are pushing their students into certain careers, that's not good, but it still doesn't detract from the fact that the private/public divide is very wide.
-
I'm glad I went to a private school because it offered me a fantastic musical education (one year's free tuition on an instrument of my choice in year 7, orchestras/ensembles/choirs, myriad concerts, etc.), which I don't think most public schools have.
It wasn't a hyper-competitive place like I'd imagine MHS or Mac.Rob would be, but there was enough of it to keep me on my toes. My school wasn't "elite" academically but we'd have at least one 99.90 or 99.95 each year.
We had some excellent teachers, which some public schools unfortunately just can't afford, e.g. my English teachers all had law degrees (overkill much?)
I don't think I would have done as well at a public school because I just lack that self-motivation, so in my case, yes a private school was instrumental in helping me to succeed.
-
the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.
yes because they're selective
-
$3.50 for my local library card, borrowed books when I needed them to supplement my textbooks and teachers.
Do you also work as a janitor at MIT?
-
People favour elite schools due to prestige, the same way as why IN GENERAL, people rate Melbourne Uni higher than Monash. That, and usually the range of facilities & corricular activities offered in elite schools. That being said, it's up to your own abilities and motivation to get a high academic score.
-
$3.50 for my local library card, borrowed books when I needed them to supplement my textbooks and teachers.
Do you also work as a janitor at MIT?
:)
-
To me it depends on what job you're after. If you need the high 90 ATAR then go to an elite school, and vice versa.
My ATAR this year was 85.70 which is fairly high in my public school. However, the environment I believe had a significant influence on my score. Not to sound cocky but I can't explain how hard it was to find motivation when you're constantly surrounded by people who couldn't care.
Do I regret going to a below average school? Absolutely not. It was enough for me to get into my course and I still received a decent education. In all honesty, I think going to a good university is more important in the long run.
-
$3.50 for my local library card, borrowed books when I needed them to supplement my textbooks and teachers.
Do you also work as a janitor at MIT?
LOL! I was watching Good Will Hunting last night :p
Anway I partially agree to both sides here. Even in a public school, if a student is motivated enought to try hard and aim high, then they will do well, (i.e. like me, don't have much but was able to get 97.75 this year, although AN might have contributed to that. Also had a mate in a similar situation that was able to achieve a 98.xx). But private schools do appear to have more resources, the ability to use more of the potential of the student. The amount that a private school will help a student over a public school will vary, if you've "got it", then you will do well anywhere with the private school giving you a slightly higher school. For others, the private school atmosphere may work better and they will have a larger difference in what they would achieve at a private school to a public school.
In the end in a public school it comes down to wether or not you can put off all the distracts and motivate yourself to work hard (it does happen). But for some going to a private school won't make a large difference.
If only education was equal and fair.
-
hey, please don't forget the kids who get schlorships into the private schools, and work rediciously hard to keep their place there.
Anyway, there are always slackers in private schools. But the careers person just tells them to not go for maths and science subjects, which is a bit mean. :(
s.
-
Something I forgot to mention. There was a 99.95 from someone at St.Albans secondary college this year (western suburbs :))). So it can be done.
-
the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.
yes because they're selective
no, i meant non-select entry (so like my school for example)
-
the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.
yes because they're selective
no, i meant non-select entry (so like my school for example)
Scotch or MGS or CGS or Haileybury are far better than GWSC or Balwyn or UHS imo
-
Are select entry schools better than top tier private schools. I went to a private primary school at its standars was rubbish(Fractions in Year 6), so I might be a bit bias but public schools seem to provide better education based on content rather environment.
-
I went to a private primary school at its standars was rubbish(Fractions in Year 6)
Public primary schools are the same, if not worse lol
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been dux of school 2 years running.
-
Out of the two best in my year at school (private), one went to a private primary school, the other a public. I don't think that the primary school has a drastic effect on the performance of the student in their later schooling years, from a strictly results perspective at least.
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been due of school 2 years running.
That doesn't mean primary public schools are all good, maybe you just know 4 good kids. I went to a primary public school (never been private), and I can tell you that it was complete crap educational-wise. Most of the people from my primary school grade 6 class (and this is a fact) got <70 ATAR on Friday. And that doesn't mean that they are "stupid" or anything, that just shows what a public environment in a school ranked ~#350 does to people who otherwise, were quite decent.
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been due of school 2 years running.
That doesn't mean primary public schools are all good, maybe you just know 4 good kids. I went to a primary public school (never been private), and I can tell you that it was complete crap educational-wise. Most of the people from my primary school grade 6 class (and this is a fact) got <70 ATAR on Friday. And that doesn't mean that they are "stupid" or anything, that just shows what a public environment in a school ranked ~#350 does to people who otherwise, were quite decent.
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been due of school 2 years running.
That doesn't mean primary public schools are all good, maybe you just know 4 good kids. I went to a primary public school (never been private), and I can tell you that it was complete crap educational-wise. Most of the people from my primary school grade 6 class (and this is a fact) got <70 ATAR on Friday. And that doesn't mean that they are "stupid" or anything, that just shows what a public environment in a school ranked ~#350 does to people who otherwise, were quite decent.
-
Out of the two best in my year at school, one went to a private primary school, the other a public. I don't think that the primary school has a drastic effect on the performance of the student in their later schooling years, from a strictly results perspective at least.
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been due of school 2 years running.
That doesn't mean primary public schools are all good, maybe you just know 4 good kids. I went to a primary public school (never been private), and I can tell you that it was complete crap educational-wise. Most of the people from my primary school grade 6 class (and this is a fact) got <70 ATAR on Friday. And that doesn't mean that they are "stupid" or anything, that just shows what a public environment in a school ranked ~#350 does to people who otherwise, were quite decent.
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been due of school 2 years running.
That doesn't mean primary public schools are all good, maybe you just know 4 good kids. I went to a primary public school (never been private), and I can tell you that it was complete crap educational-wise. Most of the people from my primary school grade 6 class (and this is a fact) got <70 ATAR on Friday. And that doesn't mean that they are "stupid" or anything, that just shows what a public environment in a school ranked ~#350 does to people who otherwise, were quite decent.
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been due of school 2 years running.
That doesn't mean primary public schools are all good, maybe you just know 4 good kids. I went to a primary public school (never been private), and I can tell you that it was complete crap educational-wise. Most of the people from my primary school grade 6 class (and this is a fact) got <70 ATAR on Friday. And that doesn't mean that they are "stupid" or anything, that just shows what a public environment in a school ranked ~#350 does to people who otherwise, were quite decent.
-
I didn't learn very much in my public primary school, and I dont think I would have learnt much more in a private one. The only possible thing from primary school that could really affect results is those schools that do the whole language immersion program. Running classes in that particular language and so the kids become pretty much fluent. (I've only heard stories, not sure how effective it is) Now that would be a huge bonus in VCE!
-
Not true. 4 of my freinds went to a public primary school and they are 4 of the smartest people I know. One has been dux of school 2 years running.
Primary school is a joke in terms of academics. Hell, even year 7 and 8 aren't particularly relevant.
-
A couple of things -
- Prep to year 9 means pretty much zilch. Yes, all these years of education and development are obviously somewhat crucial to how to grow as individuals, but I think way too much emphasis is placed on elite education right from the start. Like how some parents send their children to Haileybury as soon as they're in Prep... I can't justify spending $15K in a year like that..
- Majority of the top public schools all have zones. Glen Waverley, Balwyn and so on - they all have their school zones. The locations are prestigious and top-tier pretty much, the socio-economic status up in these areas is very high and a lot of parents buy in these zones just so their kids can go to these schools. So to compare the performance of zoned public schools with schools like mine isn't exactly on equal footing.. and it could be argued that these zoned schools are quite similar to selective schools in a sense.
- I would've loved to experience learning in a private school or selective school, but whilst yes the culture and work ethic at my school is quite questionable at times, I wouldn't swap my secondary education for a thing. I don't regret doing all the things I've done for the school and I don't regret being heavily involved in things outside of the classroom. The school has a great vibe about it, and there are some really amazing teachers here as well. So yes, public education does have some merit.
-
Werdna, I agree and disagree with what you've said
Prep to Year 9 doesn't mean nothing (i.e. it means something - sorry for the double negative), although I agree that it's ridiculous that people might spend $15K in these years, you actually do learn a lot. Even in Year 7, you can sit there and pick out the "smart kids" from the rest of the group and it's no surprise that these kids are the ones who do well in Year 12. Sure, some of them fall out in later years and some others improve, but generally, you can sort of predict who will do well in Year 12. I think that a good foundation is really important in Year 12, especially in Maths and English
Zoned schools are different to selective schools, selective schools select on academic merit, zones select on financial merits. But I do agree, most zoned schools tend to do well, that's why they're zoned. I personally think that they're zoned because they do so well and need to restrict enrolments rather than them doing well because they're zoned. It's debatable
I have to agree with you on the last point though, even though I've attended a good public school (probably one of the best 5-6 public schools in the state), I've really enjoyed my time at school, no matter how you look at it, I feel a sense of pride when I think about how well I have done given the lack of a private school education. It's like that underdog instinct I guess, but apart from just academics, I've actually loved my school's environment, the diverse range of people I've gotten to know as well as the fact that it's co-ed. SERIOUSLY, HOW DO YOU GUYS SURVIVE IN A SINGLE-SEX SCHOOL?! :S like.....?!
-
I survived through the tight bonds of brotherhood we have at Melbourne High.
All of us do become really good friends, and there's always that incentive to beat
ur friends in terms of scoring. But there's no doubt that there's always incentive
to be able to have contact with the opposite gender in co-ed schools.
More so if they're good ones like Paul's GWSC or Balwyn High or MWSC.
-
Werdna, I agree and disagree with what you've said
Prep to Year 9 doesn't mean nothing (i.e. it means something - sorry for the double negative), although I agree that it's ridiculous that people might spend $15K in these years, you actually do learn a lot. Even in Year 7, you can sit there and pick out the "smart kids" from the rest of the group and it's no surprise that these kids are the ones who do well in Year 12. Sure, some of them fall out in later years and some others improve, but generally, you can sort of predict who will do well in Year 12. I think that a good foundation is really important in Year 12, especially in Maths and English
Zoned schools are different to selective schools, selective schools select on academic merit, zones select on financial merits. But I do agree, most zoned schools tend to do well, that's why they're zoned. I personally think that they're zoned because they do so well and need to restrict enrolments rather than them doing well because they're zoned. It's debatable
I have to agree with you on the last point though, even though I've attended a good public school (probably one of the best 5-6 public schools in the state), I've really enjoyed my time at school, no matter how you look at it, I feel a sense of pride when I think about how well I have done given the lack of a private school education. It's like that underdog instinct I guess, but apart from just academics, I've actually loved my school's environment, the diverse range of people I've gotten to know as well as the fact that it's co-ed. SERIOUSLY, HOW DO YOU GUYS SURVIVE IN A SINGLE-SEX SCHOOL?! :S like.....?!
We learn to bat for the home team. ;) Jokes.
I wish I could go an elite school, just money plays such a large factor. Why can't I be around smart people in school.
:(
-
the best public schools are probably not far behind the best private schools in my opinion.
yes because they're selective
no, i meant non-select entry (so like my school for example)
Scotch or MGS or CGS or Haileybury are far better than GWSC or Balwyn or UHS imo
I have to laugh at anyone who thinks GWSC and Balwyn can be compared to the top tier private schools (Scotch, St kevs, MGS etc.)
I have experienced both and can condifently say anyone who says otherwise hasn't experienced both.
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
Elite schools doctor a certain type of work ethic. That work ethic is required to excel in not only year 12, but also in life.
It is as a result of this desired work ethic that we see a vortex of interest around these elite schools.
Just my 2cents.
and just for the record, calling someone smart is quite literally one of the worst things you could possibly do to their subconscious mind, no joke.
-
Yes, agreed with werdna,
BUT: private primary schools offer a heap of co-curricular activities. I know that kids that have started in pre-prep at my school (private, girls only, kindergarten to yr 12) are some of the most talented people, if not academic: music, sport(esp. cross country), leadership skills, good at all their subjects etc.
s.
-
Elite schools doctor a certain type of work ethic. That work ethic is required to excel in not only year 12, but also in life.
And public schools don't? When you look at the amount of resources / motivation available at an elite school in comparison to a public school, you have to work a lot harder in the public school.
I know so many people who received private tutoring and had an abundance of resources spoon-fed to them. But when they were forced to motivate themselves intrinsically in University, they struggled because the teacher wasn't there to hold their hand. Obviously this isn't the case for everyone but when it comes to work ethic a public school can be an invaluable experience.
-
Elite schools doctor a certain type of work ethic. That work ethic is required to excel in not only year 12, but also in life.
And public schools don't? When you look at the amount of resources / motivation available at an elite school in comparison to a public school, you have to work a lot harder in the public school.
I know so many people who received private tutoring and had an abundance of resources spoon-fed to them. But when they were forced to motivate themselves intrinsically in University, they struggled because the teacher wasn't there to hold their hand. Obviously this isn't the case for everyone but when it comes to work ethic a public school can be an invaluable experience.
It is true that you can come out of a public school with a good work ethic, but it is rare. Statistically speaking your chances at success is lower if you go to a public school. The average private school student has a much better work ethic than the average public school student.
There are many factors affecting how successful you are in VCE. Family influences are very important. Your peers can have an even bigger influence. Private schools don't necessarily provide a higher quality of teaching, but they do facilitate a social environment that's better for academic success.
With that said, I don't regret my public school education one bit. But I think it's interesting that most of my friends come from private schools (many of whom are successful at what they have chosen). Not being deliberately elitist, but private schools on average do produce more successful people.
-
Would you argue that it is the actual school which is the factor influencing work ethic, or is it partially the socio-economic status of your parents?
-
Would you argue that it is the actual school which is the factor influencing work ethic, or is it partially the socio-economic status of your parents?
The former I would say. Having studied at a public school at years 7 and 8 (which actually isn't THAT bad, if you navigate your way through it right) and then at a private school from year 9 onwards, you see a massive contrast. My parents are lowish middle class I think (dad's a professional, yet is working at a job in which he is overqualified and mum's doing a 'working class' job which again she is overqualified for) yet they did have a strong emphasis on study. So the only variable here was my school type and peers.
I do not for a second regret moving to my new school. The learning environment was seriously much more supportive and rewarding of hard work. Yes, at a private school you may get spoonfed quite a lot more, but that was not my experience over there; quite often I had to self-teach a couple of my subjects (being biology and english langauge to an extent, and chem I also taught myself slowly over a couple of years). The main difference was my peers' reaction to someone who puts in the work, and the social environment. At my old school, I struggled to find my footing in terms of my attitude and behaviour, as well as my social skills to an extent. When I moved to my new school, the extremely supportive and non-judgemental atmosphere (might be specific to my new school, I'm not sure) really helped me blossom as a person and as a student. The pastoral care was excellent. My peers also worked extremely hard, especially in year 12 (more than me I think actually) and that environment goaded me into putting in work myself.
I was speaking to someone who went to my old school and did well, although he should have done better. He said it was the 'slack culture' of the school that killed his study.
Just my thoughts.
@MJRomeo81: So true. Friend was telling me that in her med school the rural students are generally doing extremely well and thriving because of their independent study skills. However, I think that you can also develop a really good work ethic in a private school because of the supportive environment.
-
Motivation is hard enough to find in year 12 as it is to keep going and achieving high results. If you go to an average public school you are surrounded by people who don't really care how they are going. This causes an affect to everyone, as it isn't really a competetive environment anymore. In my Accounting class if I got over 80% (the SACs were extrememly easy) I would be ranked first. This had a huge negative impact on me as when I could of been working harder, I didn't as I believed I was getting high marks without putting much effort in. It wasn't untill I found ATARnotes I figured out that my results weren't actually that good and how hard a bad cohort could affect me. ATARnotes gave me the motivation that I deeply needed with all my SACs increasing by atleast a whole grade, but by then it was almost to late as half the year had already gone I'd performed badly in English SACs and Mid-years. Only 2 people in my school achieved a score over 90 with both of them being 95+ and we only had about 13, 40+ SS (which was shared between 6 people). If I had gone to a private school I would of realised straight away what was required to get a good ATAR and recognised earlier that my cohort at an average public school isn't a good reputation of the acedemic levels of the state. All in all I believe that sometimes it's hard to see what is required in VCE and private schools give a greater insight into this than public schools.
-
Would you argue that it is the actual school which is the factor influencing work ethic, or is it partially the socio-economic status of your parents?
Both. And placebo. And pride.
The school may or may not be actually better. But paying for it makes you believe it is better. Having slightly shinier equipment helps.
Going to one of these schools also instills some sense of pride (conscious or subconscious). It may come from the feeling that your family is 'well-off' enough to send you there, or just an ill-advised notion of 'private is better than public'. Regardless, some pride tend to have positive effects, and also promotes more competition between peers. But too much pride will create arrogant pricks, ah well.
-
Guys, the ending factor is essentially this, is it really worth paying around $60,000 or so over the years to get an ATAR which is a little bit higher than what you would have gotten in a public school?
I think that's essentially the crux of the issue, you're not going to skyrocket by going to a private school, you'll probably increase from a 99.50 to a 99.95 or something of that magnitude, but then, is it really worth it?
-
Would you argue that it is the actual school which is the factor influencing work ethic, or is it partially the socio-economic status of your parents?
maybe not so much the socio-economic status, but rather how much value they place on education
parents of low socio-economic statuses (i don't understand why it isn't stati, i think it's cause status isn't from latin?) can still have a greater value of education than ones of high socio-economic statuses
The main difference was my peers' reaction to someone who puts in the work, and the social environment. At my old school, I struggled to find my footing in terms of my attitude and behaviour, as well as my social skills to an extent. When I moved to my new school, the extremely supportive and non-judgemental atmosphere (might be specific to my new school, I'm not sure) really helped me blossom as a person and as a student. The pastoral care was excellent. My peers also worked extremely hard, especially in year 12 (more than me I think actually) and that environment goaded me into putting in work myself.
that's actually a point i've never thought of before, the support and the attitude of your peers, but hmmm, that makes me think about the general attitude at my school. I must admit, I do enjoy being in a school where I'm "above average" - not the smartest kid around but ahead of many other students, because that's a nice place to be, you can help out other people, and feel some pride to where you are, yet there's still those ahead of you so you will keep on trying. I'm not sure of whether an environment where I'm pushed more into the "average" category would help me...hmm, it's just something interesting to bite on
-
Guys, the ending factor is essentially this, is it really worth paying around $60,000 or so over the years to get an ATAR which is a little bit higher than what you would have gotten in a public school?
I think that's essentially the crux of the issue, you're not going to skyrocket by going to a private school, you'll probably increase from a 99.50 to a 99.95 or something of that magnitude, but then, is it really worth it?
Right, because everyone who gets sent to a private school is going to get an ATAR of 99.5 to start with...
Take a kid who would normally get an ATAR of say, 65, put him in a private school and he's going to get more than 65.45
-
Guys, the ending factor is essentially this, is it really worth paying around $60,000 or so over the years to get an ATAR which is a little bit higher than what you would have gotten in a public school?
I think that's essentially the crux of the issue, you're not going to skyrocket by going to a private school, you'll probably increase from a 99.50 to a 99.95 or something of that magnitude, but then, is it really worth it?
No it's not. Schooling isn't just about ATAR. Academically, my school only made a difference for me in that it inspired me towards taking up philosophy, and to take literature seriously. For me, high school was much more about the opportunities that I was presented with, in drama and in music in particular.
-
Guys, the ending factor is essentially this, is it really worth paying around $60,000 or so over the years to get an ATAR which is a little bit higher than what you would have gotten in a public school?
I think that's essentially the crux of the issue, you're not going to skyrocket by going to a private school, you'll probably increase from a 99.50 to a 99.95 or something of that magnitude, but then, is it really worth it?
Right, because everyone who gets sent to a private school is going to get an ATAR of 99.5 to start with...
Take a kid who would normally get an ATAR of say, 65, put him in a private school and he's going to get more than 65.45
Russ, Paulsterio is suggesting that a kid who tries to get his best in a public school and tries to get his best in a private school will not differ too greatly.
Not about a kid who is underachieving in his public school.
@EZ, my brother goes to a private school in Melbourne and I went to public ( He is on a sporting scholarship for Track and Field after representing Australia at World Youth Games). I can vouch, you guys do receive opportunities that us public schoolers never got.
-
Guys, the ending factor is essentially this, is it really worth paying around $60,000 or so over the years to get an ATAR which is a little bit higher than what you would have gotten in a public school?
I think that's essentially the crux of the issue, you're not going to skyrocket by going to a private school, you'll probably increase from a 99.50 to a 99.95 or something of that magnitude, but then, is it really worth it?
If you have the money to spare, or you get a scholarship, or your parents are willing to make sacrifices to afford it, then why not? The difference between my ATAR and a 99.95 would have made the difference between me getting into med and "settling" for law, and I am by no means a unique snowflake in this regard.
-
imo if ur a good student with a good work ethic any score is possible regardless of the school.
sure the atmosphere is different, but its just the students around you studying hard that makes you want to study hard as well.
One of the teachers at my school (really bad school) went on to teach at glen waverley this year.
In terms of his teaching, he was pretty average, and in some manners detrimental
and yet at glen waverley apparently he was hailed as a physics god who is really tank (not to say the guy was bad, but the extent he spoonfed his students was just lol. Also he is really tank, and he was the witer of maths quest). What i'm trying to say is, it's not necessarily good schools have good teachers, many mhs people have told me this too.
If you really need a kick in the arse to study, then there is fault in you, not in your school. Encourage your own friends to study and build the same atmosphere instead of moaning about how if you went to a better school you could have gotten a better ATAR.
You're just looking for excuses..
-
How does one become good student with a good work ethic? Are you saying that it comes from birth? Surely schools play a significant role in carving the attributes of healthy study.
-
What I'm saying is,
you have a goal atar for self-satisfaction or to get in your course, say 98+
then isn't it your responsibility to get this ATAR? Schools will help, but if you buckle down and strive for your goals then surely you can achieve it without going to a good school.
But if you complain about how your shit school brought your ATAR down because the teachers were shit and the students were crap then you're just making excuses.
At a school like mine, people have ATAR goals too, just significantly lower than the students in top schools and students study accordingly, that's good work ethic.
-
Right, because everyone who gets sent to a private school is going to get an ATAR of 99.5 to start with...
Take a kid who would normally get an ATAR of say, 65, put him in a private school and he's going to get more than 65.45
No, it was an example, but in my eyes, the kids who get phenomenal ATARs at private schools would have gotten not much worse had they been at a public school. Let's take someone like student A who gets 99.95 at a prestigious private school. So if he goes to a public school, he still has a high chance of getting 99+, maybe not 99.95, but surely 99+. So is that small increment worth it to go to a private school?
And then there's the issue of parents who send their kids to private schools because they think that's all they need to do to ensure their child receives a good ATAR. I know a friend of a friend of mine who got an ATAR in the low 70s at Haileybury. He's now doing a course that requires an ATAR of mid 60's (I think it was around 65 last year, not too sure, but around there). Do you honestly think that money there was money well spent? His parents spent somewhere around the magnitude of $60,000 for their child to get an ATAR in the 70s. They could have just provided proper support, assisted their child personally, found him a few good tutors (or tutor him themself), get him a few more books and send him to their local public school and he might have gotten a better ATAR. I think this scenario happens quite a lot, don't you think?
One of the teachers at my school (really bad school) went on to teach at glen waverley this year.
In terms of his teaching, he was pretty average, and in some manners detrimental
and yet at glen waverley apparently he was hailed as a physics god who is really tank (not to say the guy was bad, but the extent he spoonfed his students was just lol. Also he is really tank, and he was the witer of maths quest). What i'm trying to say is, it's not necessarily good schools have good teachers, many mhs people have told me this too.
LOL! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?! THIS GUY IS THE BEST TEACHER IN THE WORLD!!!! (he's god at glen waverley!!!) - had him for physics! :D
he's not the writer of MQ btw, that's his brother, all of his siblings are teachers =.="
how is he detrimental though? I found that he was a knowledgeable and good teacher?
imo if ur a good student with a good work ethic any score is possible regardless of the school.
agreed, period.
If you have the money to spare, or you get a scholarship, or your parents are willing to make sacrifices to afford it, then why not? The difference between my ATAR and a 99.95 would have made the difference between me getting into med and "settling" for law, and I am by no means a unique snowflake in this regard.
true, i do agree with you there, if I do end up not getting into med, I will probably think about my ATAR long and hard, but the truth is, I don't have enough money to go to a private school, scholarship or no scholarship, my family wouldn't even be able to afford the uniform and the travel costs :(
-
One of the teachers at my school (really bad school) went on to teach at glen waverley this year.
In terms of his teaching, he was pretty average, and in some manners detrimental
and yet at glen waverley apparently he was hailed as a physics god who is really tank (not to say the guy was bad, but the extent he spoonfed his students was just lol. Also he is really tank, and he was the witer of maths quest). What i'm trying to say is, it's not necessarily good schools have good teachers, many mhs people have told me this too.
LOL! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?! THIS GUY IS THE BEST TEACHER IN THE WORLD!!!! (he's god at glen waverley!!!) - had him for physics! :D
he's not the writer of MQ btw, that's his brother, all of his siblings are teachers =.="
how is he detrimental though? I found that he was a knowledgeable and good teacher?
Well like, in yr 11 his methods class averaged 90+% for SACs (even the worst of students) and i was getting like high 80's low 90s
come exam time, where they had none of his help, not a single student got over 35% (i got a high 80 iirc) because he wasn't there to spoonfeed them
he helped them like mid-sacs and pre-sacs gave them permutations of the questions and like worked solutions.
apparently he did this at your school too o.O (source wishes to remain anonymous)
-
No, it was an example, but in my eyes, the kids who get phenomenal ATARs at private schools would have gotten not much worse had they been at a public school. Let's take someone like student A who gets 99.95 at a prestigious private school. So if he goes to a public school, he still has a high chance of getting 99+, maybe not 99.95, but surely 99+. So is that small increment worth it to go to a private school?
And then there's the issue of parents who send their kids to private schools because they think that's all they need to do to ensure their child receives a good ATAR. I know a friend of a friend of mine who got an ATAR in the low 70s at Haileybury. He's now doing a course that requires an ATAR of mid 60's (I think it was around 65 last year, not too sure, but around there). Do you honestly think that money there was money well spent? His parents spent somewhere around the magnitude of $60,000 for their child to get an ATAR in the 70s. They could have just provided proper support, assisted their child personally, found him a few good tutors (or tutor him themself), get him a few more books and send him to their local public school and he might have gotten a better ATAR. I think this scenario happens quite a lot, don't you think?
Well, if you read the responses from people who did go to private schools, you'd realise that getting a good ATAR is only one of the many benefits you receive.
-
What I'm saying is,
you have a goal atar for self-satisfaction or to get in your course, say 98+
then isn't it your responsibility to get this ATAR? Schools will help, but if you buckle down and strive for your goals then surely you can achieve it without going to a good school.
But if you complain about how your shit school brought your ATAR down because the teachers were shit and the students were crap then you're just making excuses.
At a school like mine, people have ATAR goals too, just significantly lower than the students in top schools and students study accordingly, that's good work ethic.
I agree, there is some blame that can be shifted towards the students themselves. But it is imperative to have an understanding of the wider world to draw upon developing this hard working ethos. A small minority, who are "gifted" (if you can deem it this way), will have a greater insight of the world or a natural passion for academics, and they will, indeed regardless of school, proceed to acquire a high score in ATAR.
I also agree you can attain a 98+ ATAR, but how much of this is so reliant in the fields of maths,science and language, and the mark ups that it rewards?
For the field of languages, isn't it agreeable, that kids who develop this skill from an early age will have a significant greater chance in achieving a high SS and therefore ATAR in the long term? It is schools that present these opportunities, but also the students that it brings in to develop a competitive atmosphere?
Granted, there will be a small division of students who will naturally be keen to study; however, only a minority. For the majority, a competitive atmosphere is key to a successful ATAR but also the foundations that has been instilled since an early age that makes getting 98+ ATAR plus such a breeze for the "elite students." And thus, elite schools should be favored as it presents these privileges that "shit" schools cannot.
-
It’s a bit of both in my opinion. Going to an 'elite' school will only get one so far. Sure, the environment and teachers may be better than public schools but, private schools will always have students who end up getting low scores around 60-70, even in the 50s and 40s. That’s fact. It’s just not publicised as much, if at all - to maintain the school’s reputation. I knew a fare few students who took going to a private school for granted and thought that because they go to a ‘good’ school that they will automatically get really good scores at the end of it all - which is not the case at all. If you don’t work hard, then you won’t get anywhere; regardless of the school one attends. However, having been to private school, it's not all about 'study, study, study'. I think one of the many reasons why parents send their child/children to private schools, in particular (given that they can afford to), is because such schools are able to provide extra-curricular activities/opportunities such as music, drama and sports.
-
Well like, in yr 11 his methods class averaged 90+% for SACs (even the worst of students) and i was getting like high 80's low 90s
come exam time, where they had none of his help, not a single student got over 35% (i got a high 80 iirc) because he wasn't there to spoonfeed them
he helped them like mid-sacs and pre-sacs gave them permutations of the questions and like worked solutions.
apparently he did this at your school too o.O (source wishes to remain anonymous)
he wouldn't give worked solutions, but he'd sort of hint that something would be on the SAC, like he would say something along the lines of "there's energy level diagrams on the SAC" which isn't really that bad per se
-
Personally I wouldn't go to a private school to get a high ATAR. I don't know why people complain about it, like I got a rather low score, and yet I get into the course I want. The fact that I will get to undertake higher education is astounding to me. Kids that are put in these expensive schools shouldn't abuse it. I went to a school which I felt at times there were a lack of resources and a lack of environment for me to actually do well.
To me going to an elite school only benefits you if they have high quality teachers, better resources/facilities, better equipment, better subject choice (couldn't get into a few subjects I would've liked), etc...
Epl is correct with saying it will only get you so far, you need motivation and that can only come from yourself.
-
I also agree you can attain a 98+ ATAR, but how much of this is so reliant in the fields of maths,science and language, and the mark ups that it rewards?
For the field of languages, isn't it agreeable, that kids who develop this skill from an early age will have a significant greater chance in achieving a high SS and therefore ATAR in the long term? It is schools that present these opportunities, but also the students that it brings in to develop a competitive atmosphere?
Granted, there will be a small division of students who will naturally be keen to study; however, only a minority. For the majority, a competitive atmosphere is key to a successful ATAR but also the foundations that has been instilled since an early age that makes getting 98+ ATAR plus such a breeze for the "elite students." And thus, elite schools should be favored as it presents these privileges that "shit" schools cannot.
sorry im not quite sure what you're trying to say here
In regards to maths, sciences, languages, your saying this because of the scaling?
scaling exists to even things up, no subject offers advantages. The accounting course was far easier to learn than the methods course, and the cohort far less competitive, hence methods should be scaled more than accounting = makes sense.
what do you mean early age? 3-4, primary school, year 7-9 ?
I did 4 years of indonesian and at the end of it, i knew how to count to 5 and say good afternoon,
and 2 years of italian and could count to 10 and say 'my name is' and 'hello, good bye'. My school gave me the opportunity, but i passed up on it, just as many of my friends from better schools have, so i disagree, again. Many high-scoring LOTE students just do the language their parents speak eg csl
a 98+ ATAR is indeed the minority (2% of vce students)
And in terms of foundations instilled at an early age, a guy at my school literally bummed around years 7-10 failing most tests, passing few and was also an annoying prick. Come year 12 he says 'i wanna be a lawyer' and dedicates himself to his work. he got 97, and actually helped me a lot too with one of my subjects.
At the end of the day, unless your school actually screws you over (stuffs up SAC ranking or something) or doesn't offer a subject, your VCE is your responsibility and your failure is your fault
-
That is your fault for not taking advantages of these privileges. They are privileges for a reason. I never said that schools are 100% sole factor in molding you, but they are a significant portion.
I have also alluded to the wider world understanding that you have failed to address (elite schools, top tier schools, will naturally offer a wide range of students, those who are truly competitively intellectually but at a much more significant demographic and therefore a greater influence on other students and of course, the other spectrum being dumbasses and whatnot.). You have also failed to acknowledge that when I implicated minority, it is not the 98+, but the people who are truly passionate about studying. Anyone can potentially get 98+, but opportunities and circumstance once again can lead this astray.
Family etc are all other variables, that I will not discuss. But schools are there to provide a footing stone for you. And a greater quality footing stone will offer you the advantage of leaping farther, both in life, in personality and endeavor. That is, if you don't take advantage of it, you indeed, have no one to blame but absolutely your self and your ignorance whether conscious or unconscious. But if it unconscious, then it beckons the thought about school and environment that you are brought up in which therefore undermines my previous sentence.
-
This is a really pointless and circled debate because those who attended a public school will always portray public schools as adequate and private schools as rich and excessive to the point of over-indulgence. Those who went to private schools will always see that public schools have lack in culture or attitude and opportunities which they supposedly have in bundles.
It comes down to where we were educated. Those in public schools, such as myself, will forever believe that education should never be privatised and that the government is pouring water into buckets which are already full and overflowing whilst the emptiest buckets receive but a mere drop of water. I'm also of the belief that it is the family and the student themselves, not the school which will shape the student's future. I understand that those who went to private schools will see it a different way, I know that if I went to a private school, maybe I would understand more about these benefits which seem a little far-fetched to me. I'm sure that if some of those who did year 12 in a private school went to a public school, they will too understand that it's not terrible, that there are competitive students and that the environment is warm and friendly too.
I think that people don't favour elite schools, it's just that most parents are anxious and just want their child to do their best, they're often mistaken that it is their child, not the school which will be the deciding factor. Good students, no matter where they are, will always be good. Bad students, even in the best school in the world, will fail to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
-
This is a really pointless and circled debate because those who attended a public school will always portray public schools as adequate and private schools as rich and excessive to the point of over-indulgence. Those who went to private schools will always see that public schools have lack in culture or attitude and opportunities which they supposedly have in bundles.
It comes down to where we were educated. Those in public schools, such as myself, will forever believe that education should never be privatised and that the government is pouring water into buckets which are already full and overflowing whilst the emptiest buckets receive but a mere drop of water. I'm also of the belief that it is the family and the student themselves, not the school which will shape the student's future. I understand that those who went to private schools will see it a different way, I know that if I went to a private school, maybe I would understand more about these benefits which seem a little far-fetched to me. I'm sure that if some of those who did year 12 in a private school went to a public school, they will too understand that it's not terrible, that there are competitive students and that the environment is warm and friendly too.
I think that people don't favour elite schools, it's just that most parents are anxious and just want their child to do their best, they're often mistaken that it is their child, not the school which will be the deciding factor. Good students, no matter where they are, will always be good. Bad students, even in the best school in the world, will fail to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
you think that school is just for academics. That is NOT what a private school is. and you say those who have attended either will support that one. I Have attended both, so can comment that its not all about academics!
-
Right, because everyone who gets sent to a private school is going to get an ATAR of 99.5 to start with...
Take a kid who would normally get an ATAR of say, 65, put him in a private school and he's going to get more than 65.45
No, it was an example, but in my eyes, the kids who get phenomenal ATARs at private schools would have gotten not much worse had they been at a public school. Let's take someone like student A who gets 99.95 at a prestigious private school. So if he goes to a public school, he still has a high chance of getting 99+, maybe not 99.95, but surely 99+. So is that small increment worth it to go to a private school?
Did you seriously just ignore what I posted and then repeat the exact same thing you originally posted?
To me going to an elite school only benefits you if they have high quality teachers, better resources/facilities, better equipment, better subject choice (couldn't get into a few subjects I would've liked), etc...
Epl is correct with saying it will only get you so far, you need motivation and that can only come from yourself.
Yeah, of course. But the thing is, private schools generally have all these things, as well as plenty of non academic benefits.
Those in public schools, such as myself, will forever believe that education should never be privatised and that the government is pouring water into buckets which are already full and overflowing whilst the emptiest buckets receive but a mere drop of water.
Rubbish, but nice hyperbole. Nobody is saying that only the rich deserve education. Your opinion on education most certainly does not depend on where you were educated, all it requires is the ability to compare the average private/public school.
This thread isn't about how public schools are for the lesser student and that nobody can succeed there, so nobody should be getting defensive about their education. When it comes down to public and private education, there is unfortunately a gap - the gap exists and denying its presence is not going to help anybody. You can be successful at a public school, but at a private school you are offered more tools and opportunities in the pursuit of your goals, be they academic or otherwise. Old boys/girls networks are pretty much the greatest benefit you will ever get from a private school and it's unfortunate that they're so pervasive, but such is life.
In general, if you put a disinterested student in a private school from a public school, it won't act as some magic tonic to make him/her interested. But it will probably improve his/her prospects measurably. If you think otherwise, you're either willfully ignorant or have some evidence that nobody has seen before.
That's my last comment on the matter unless somebody posts something worth responding to.
-
Wow, this thread has gone way off topic since my opening post... It's not about private vs public, guys. I'm talking elite vs non-elite here (refer to my opening post).
-
Idk, but being in a private school motivated me in a way which made me want to please my parents for sending me to such a good facilitated school. My gratitude to them was my score, and ultimately in hindsight if I went to the public school I was originally going to go to (not a very well renowned one), I definitely would of felt rather bitter about it and not push myself to the extreme to reap the rewards.
-
Well, I suppose the poorer schools, or those kind of tafe schools according to the latest issue of the herald sun's 'how well did your school go?'do tend to get worse scores, and that's understandable. They are the furthest away from libraries, universities where students have the ability to study to the best ability. But, as a whole elite schools, or even the better government schools do tend to have better results because of their cohorts, but population in the school is also a factor in that too.
-
you think that school is just for academics. That is NOT what a private school is. and you say those who have attended either will support that one. I Have attended both, so can comment that its not all about academics!
yes i understand, but that's cause that's what it looks like to you, having been at a private school. personally, i've never experienced that (so i guess you could call me ignorant), but i really haven't felt the need for any non-academic activities inside school, i have a great group of friends outside of school, i play sports, i play guitar...etc. that's all out of school, i don't really understand the integration between education and co-curricular achievements
This thread isn't about how public schools are for the lesser student and that nobody can succeed there, so nobody should be getting defensive about their education. When it comes down to public and private education, there is unfortunately a gap - the gap exists and denying its presence is not going to help anybody. You can be successful at a public school, but at a private school you are offered more tools and opportunities in the pursuit of your goals, be they academic or otherwise. Old boys/girls networks are pretty much the greatest benefit you will ever get from a private school and it's unfortunate that they're so pervasive, but such is life.
I understand that there's a gap, nobody can deny that, otherwise there's no point paying to be at a private school, my ponderings were based on whether this gap is worth the $60,000 or so spent over the years, that's what I'm thinking more towards.
And hey, I don't mean to offend anyone, but like I said, the way this thread is going, it's leading to nowhere, it's an opinionable issue, with points supporting both sides, but having never been at a private school myself, I can only say that I have been more than satisfied with my public school education and that in retrospect, I wouldn't have it any other way. I've come to love my school as well as its shortcomings (e.g. bad English scores, scant co-curricular compared to private schools) because I've found ways to give myself those opportunities outside of school. I'm very proud to say that I come from a school which costs me $400 per year in school fees, a school where the uniform costs me only $150 per two years
-
you think that school is just for academics. That is NOT what a private school is. and you say those who have attended either will support that one. I Have attended both, so can comment that its not all about academics!
yes i understand, but that's cause that's what it looks like to you, having been at a private school. personally, i've never experienced that (so i guess you could call me ignorant), but i really haven't felt the need for any non-academic activities inside school, i have a great group of friends outside of school, i play sports, i play guitar...etc. that's all out of school, i don't really understand the integration between education and co-curricular achievements
This thread isn't about how public schools are for the lesser student and that nobody can succeed there, so nobody should be getting defensive about their education. When it comes down to public and private education, there is unfortunately a gap - the gap exists and denying its presence is not going to help anybody. You can be successful at a public school, but at a private school you are offered more tools and opportunities in the pursuit of your goals, be they academic or otherwise. Old boys/girls networks are pretty much the greatest benefit you will ever get from a private school and it's unfortunate that they're so pervasive, but such is life.
I understand that there's a gap, nobody can deny that, otherwise there's no point paying to be at a private school, my ponderings were based on whether this gap is worth the $60,000 or so spent over the years, that's what I'm thinking more towards.
And hey, I don't mean to offend anyone, but like I said, the way this thread is going, it's leading to nowhere, it's an opinionable issue, with points supporting both sides, but having never been at a private school myself, I can only say that I have been more than satisfied with my public school education and that in retrospect, I wouldn't have it any other way. I've come to love my school as well as its shortcomings (e.g. bad English scores, scant co-curricular compared to private schools) because I've found ways to give myself those opportunities outside of school. I'm very proud to say that I come from a school which costs me $400 per year in school fees, a school where the uniform costs me only $150 per two years
What if you could have a guaranteed place right now for csp MBBS at Monash by paying the extra $60,000 for a private school? Would you regret not paying that? (I know not to ask about UoM MD course because according to you, that course is rubbish compared to Monash MBBS)
-
I wouldn't have it any other way.
Do you know the "other way"??
-
I wouldn't have it any other way.
Do you know the "other way"??
From memory, he went to a private primary school, if that counts for anything :P
-
This is something I picked up.
Just curious @paulsterio, you chose science as your second preference after bachelor of medicine/ surgery at monash. What was it that made you choose science instead of biomedicine? Considering your first preference that is. :)
-
Water, but that's a wrong comparison, you don't get guaranteed MBBS at Monash by going to a private school
JDog and pi, that's what I mean by this discussion not being able to proceed any further, a lot of people who only went to public schools, like myself, will be more than satisfied with what they've had
El2012, because there more flexibility in science :)
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
Think I might try to add something to this discussion, based on my own experiences...
I went to an outer-suburban public school which was (and is) known for excellence in extra-curricular activities such as music, art and oddly enough, volleyball - despite being academically very average. Also, it's very progressive (no uniform) and filled with a high proportion of kids with very lazy attitudes - although my year level did possess several high-achieving students too.
Yet my school's teachers - in particular the ones I had in year 12 - were very capable and dedicated to their jobs. I really, really liked my school and when I finished VCE, was proud to have achieved our school's highest ATAR in years. Without hesitation, I would say that I couldn't have asked for a better school to finish VCE at. I shouldn't need to, but I feel I should clarify that I am non-Asian, played quite a lot of sport during the year and attended plenty of 18ths even in the months building up to exams, so I wasn't a hermit ;)
The main flaw, though, was our poor academic environment. Most of the people I mixed with at school were higher achievers than the norm at my school, which helped - but I sometimes felt that my English result would have been better if the other students in my class were stronger, so the teacher could teach to a higher standard. I feel that English, especially, is a subject which is dominated in elite schools for this reason. Another problem - which the OP mentioned - is that many at my school don't believe they can do well, because "we never get good results". You can guess how these types perform.
Although, I would have strongly disliked having rigid uniform regulations imposed on me, so my school suited me well. I loved wearing whatever the f**k I wanted to school. But at the end of the day, horses for courses.
-
I didn't even read your initial statement, soz too long...
However I have been at a state school for 3 years and I finished my last 3 years in a private school.
The private school was better by far.
I used to believe that it is up to the individual, but seriously it's not, the individual thrives from guidance, however subtle it is. A key example is how private schools are usually on top of a study design whenever anything changes due to high quality educators that are present in the examining system. I didn't do psychology this year, but there is a new study design, introducing Alzeimers. My school stayed on top, and guess what 10 mark question on the back of the paper about it. 3/4 of state flunked that, many in other public schools (like the one i used to go to) had students doing badly not because they are not motivated or bad students, they simply learnt what is given, unfortunately not being all there is. Similarly this year some physics teachers in state schools continue to teach the 2007 study design, useless... All in all it comes down to you, but that extra something comes from a proper institution
-
Similarly this year some physics teachers in state schools continue to teach the 2007 study design, useless
Well that's why I refer to the study design and develop my own plan and study according to it, no matter where you are, if you study from the study design, you'll be good for the exam
Private schools may teach you everything, but it's not as if they pull this info out of nowhere, it came from resources and if you're saavy enough to find them if you're in a public school, you'll be just as well equipped, that's what I did personally
-
leaving 80% of class time useless, but it's free so who gives a damn
-
leaving 80% of class time useless, but it's free so who gives a damn
that's true to an extent, I've never been someone who uses class time effectively, I just usually talk and discuss things, but discussion does help us learn i guess ;D LOL! =.="
-
I think we can conclude one thing from this discussion. This is one issue that will be impossible to gain a consensus on, as everyone has vastly different experiences and viewpoints depending on what schools they attended.
If I have kids and when I start to think about where they complete their secondary education - I won't be thinking "definitely private" or "definitely public". I'll just choose a quality school that suits their needs. And that's an attitude I think more people should take.
-
If I have kids and when I start to think about where they complete their secondary education - I won't be thinking "definitely private" or "definitely public". I'll just choose a quality school that suits their needs. And that's an attitude I think more people should take.
What do you think most parents do today?
-
What do you think most parents do today?
Blindly send their kids to a private school, paying $20,000 a year and not giving their kids personal attention, which is far more important to academic success than the actual school
-
What do you think most parents do today?
Blindly send their kids to a private school, paying $20,000 a year and not giving their kids personal attention, which is far more important to academic success than the actual school
Hey! Not true :( I would send my kids to a $20,000 private school based on its culture and excellent pastoral care. :D
-
^^^ I think Paul has got a point, there are many (not all though! - as thushan alluded to) parents like this *looks at Xavier*
-
Hey! Not true :( I would send my kids to a $20,000 private school based on its culture and excellent pastoral care. :D
Well, not everyone is as critical as you Thushan, there's a lot of parents out there who send their kids to private schools for the wrong reasons, I personally know quite a few people like this
Although you're right as well, most of the high achievers would be the ones who take full advantage of the private school's facilities
^^^ I think Paul has got a point, there are many (not all though! - as thushan alluded to) parents like this *looks at Xavier*
Is Xavier that bad?
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
people really have a wrong perception about xavier.
The media is always waiting to jump on a story concerning private schools (the big ones especially i.e. scotch, grammar, skevs and xavier)
-
The media, well to be honest, I think they're just into the "shock" type news, where people who read it will be surprised and people would no doubt be more surprised if a student from a top notch grammar school decides to do something socially unacceptable as compared to a student from a public school in a lower socio-economic suburb.
In terms of wrong perceptions about Xavier, I'm not sure, because I think Xavier lacks the reputation that many other private schools have. Scotch, Melbourne Grammar, even Haileybury are more known to be really high achieving (you could also add Essendon Grammar too I guess) - but is Xavier really a top-knotch private school?
-
the main three are scotch, MGS and skevs
-
I didn't even read your initial statement, soz too long...
However I have been at a state school for 3 years and I finished my last 3 years in a private school.
The private school was better by far.
I used to believe that it is up to the individual, but seriously it's not, the individual thrives from guidance, however subtle it is. A key example is how private schools are usually on top of a study design whenever anything changes due to high quality educators that are present in the examining system. I didn't do psychology this year, but there is a new study design, introducing Alzeimers. My school stayed on top, and guess what 10 mark question on the back of the paper about it. 3/4 of state flunked that, many in other public schools (like the one i used to go to) had students doing badly not because they are not motivated or bad students, they simply learnt what is given, unfortunately not being all there is. Similarly this year some physics teachers in state schools continue to teach the 2007 study design, useless... All in all it comes down to you, but that extra something comes from a proper institution
I think it is unfair to the majority of public school teachers to say that they aren't on top of the new study design, maybe it might be fair to say that they aren't as 'on top of it', but certainly they would be aware of it (apart from maybe a few bad teachers? I don't know), it is barely secret knowledge and if nothing else the textbooks are written in reference to the study design. But even pretending that you're correct in saying that, there is nothing to stop a student from tracking the study design down for themselves. Most won't because the education system is not geared towards fostering independence at a secondary level. This is a problem for all schools, public or private, and it is an even bigger problem for public school students because they are not guaranteed that level of mollycoddling all of the time.
The question I would pose is whether having resources simply handed to you is in fact educationally better (ignoring the study score that comes out of it) than cultivating the initiative and curiosity required to seek out information. In terms of life preparation, I can say that it would be impossible to rely on the former at university or at most workplaces.
-
the main three are scotch, MGS and skevs
skevs? oh really? hmmm, I've always thought that haileybury would be up there with the best
-
The school I went to:
-Half my teachers in year 12 did not bother with properly teaching the course, had a neutral stance toward academically achieving and failed miserably with the construction of internal SAC's.
-90% of the cohort didn't care about their ATAR's and thus created a poor learning and motivational environment.
-1 Practise exam per study 2 weeks before the English exam, which was a total farce.
This lessened my ability to do well, but with a stringent application of study I exceeded the cleary-in ATAR I needed. Yes, if my parents had been able to afford a more academically focussed school, I would have done better, but it is really up to the individual to apply themselves.
-
Blindly send their kids to a private school, paying $20,000 a year and not giving their kids personal attention, which is far more important to academic success than the actual school
Yes, all rich parents have no conception of the value of money and will gleefully throw it away. Again, stop focusing on the few extreme examples and look at what most parents do. Most of them can afford the money, sure, but they're not going to spend it unless they think it's a worthwhile endeavor.
-
I think it is unfair to the majority of public school teachers to say that they aren't on top of the new study design
That's true, all of my teachers were familiar with the study design and taught accordingly, none of my teachers taught anything that was from the old study design...etc. I think it's a matter of the teachers themselves rather than the school. I'm sure there are teachers in private schools who aren't top notch as well.
Also, no, cultivating the initiative and curiosity is better, although it may not lead to a higher study score, this can probably only be done individually. I can honestly say my school didn't influence the subjects I'm interested in and that's all been dependent on what I've always enjoyed since childhood.
This lessened my ability to do well, but with a stringent application of study I exceeded the cleary-in ATAR I needed. Yes, if my parents had been able to afford a more academically focussed school, I would have done better, but it is really up to the individual to apply themselves.
It sure is, it's always up to the individual, otherwise, why do you get people who get in the 60s in top notch private schools and people who get 99.95 in public schools which aren't known for academic prowess.
Yes, all rich parents have no conception of the value of money and will gleefully throw it away. Again, stop focusing on the few extreme examples and look at what most parents do. Most of them can afford the money, sure, but they're not going to spend it unless they think it's a worthwhile endeavor.
Yep, definately, they think it's a worthwhile endeavour, but they are mistaken, had their parents taught them properly, instilled the values of education in them and encouraged them to become interested in academics and its importance, their children will do much better than if they were sent to a private school without support. There's a strong correlation between a parent's educational level and a child's performance at school too.
-
What do you think most parents do today?
Blindly send their kids to a private school, paying $20,000 a year and not giving their kids personal attention, which is far more important to academic success than the actual school
personal attention? Lol? My parents aren't well off and they basically worked their assess off so I could even put on my uniform each day. You shouldn't make such an ignorant generalization - you'd be surprised the amount of parents which care to make such sacrifices.
-
Wow, this thread has gone way off topic since my opening post... It's not about private vs public, guys. I'm talking elite vs non-elite here (refer to my opening post).
It's just the branding. Also, I guess when you go to an "elite" school you get to be in "elite" circles in society.
-
personal attention? Lol? My parents aren't well off and they basically worked their assess off so I could even put on my uniform each day. You shouldn't make such an ignorant generalization - you'd be surprised the amount of parents which care to make such sacrifices.
But my point goes back to exactly this, now my family and I have had a lot of discussions over this topic, because I have a lot of younger siblings (my youngest isn't even a year old yet) - is it better for students for their parents to relax a little bit about work to give time and attention to their children, or to work their asses off, so that they have so little time, whilst being able to send their child to a private school.
I've always been of the belief that parents should give their children time over sending their kids to expensive schools whilst lacking that attention.
So is that sacrifice beneficial? - I'm not saying it is or it isn't, that's debatable, I'm just saying that in my view, it isn't - so don't think I'm having a go at your or anything :)
-
try to get a scholarship to a private school.....
all of the top tier schools offer scholarships
-
try to get a scholarship to a private school.....
all of the top tier schools offer scholarships
hmm, that's a good point actually, but even after scholarships, private schools do get expensive, in terms of just uniform and other costs as well, not to mention transport if you live far away. Transport time and costs was one of the reasons why I decided not to go to MHS.
-
Transport time is over-rated, you can catch up on sleep or socialise or even study on the train network. I took public transport since yr7 and its never been an issue.
-
you can get full scholarships to all private schools,
we have second hand uniform shops that are as cheap as public school's uniforms. Travelling to scotch,skevs would take 30 minutes from gwav.
-
This is more of a rant than a debate, but feel free to comment. I don't intend to insult anyone, but people may find themselves offended. If you do feel hurt or angered by my comments, I apologise. You can probably detect a frustrated tone in my words. I feel like I just need to get this off my chest.
-----
Back when my father was at high school, he just went to the local state school. While he was there, he was exposed to a lot of different students with different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, as well as varying (although overall, below average) academic abilities. My dad, although not the smartest of students, was an incredibly hard worker and had a desire for a more prosperous future. He ended up being the school's dux and was one of the few students from that school to ever go to Melbourne University.
He's always told me that it did not matter where I went to school - as long as I wanted to do well, I'd do well wherever I went. My mother, on the other hand, who attended a private school (and was not very academic), was very keen to send me to an 'elite' school. After many months of squabbling about 'my parents' investment in my education' and touring many of the best schools in Melbourne, my parents both felt the local private boy's school was the best choice - a happy medium between my parents' experiences. Most of the boys from my local primary school were going there as well.
I go to a fairly modest school. It is certainly not an elite school, by any standards. Most year levels here start off with about 200 students, with eight classes of approximately 25 students in each. When we get to Years 11 and 12, about a quarter of the students elect to undertake the VCAL program and the rest of us do VCE. We're not well-known for our academic excellence - we only get about 20 students each year who get an ATAR of 90 or above. Our school is further humbled by the presence of many other elite private schools in the area. Many of my peers tend to blame the teachers or the school itself for their poor academic success, despite it usually being their own fault. My friends' parents have also threatened them that if they fail to perform well academically at this school, that they will be moved to a more elite school. Other than the usual 5 or 6 boys who sit the Melbourne High exam and pass, most students who leave our school expect their new school will be the solution to all their academic problems. It's as if the students feel they have to live out the reputation of their school - 'my school's crap, my education will be crap so I might as well do crap while I'm here'.
I've always believed that every teacher is more or less the same wherever you go. I know personally that there are certainly bad teachers out there - trust me, I've had a few over the years myself. But they all have similar qualifications and the school they teach at is not determined by their ability; in most cases the school they work at is close to home or it was the school they attended when they were younger. So why do people believe that certain schools will guarantee academic success, while others will not? A lot of these elite schools seem to gear themselves towards VCE success by 'poaching' talent away from other schools. We credit certain schools for their high quality of education when they merely lure achieving students in the form of scholarships and kick out underachieving students. Each year at my school, we get a major intake of students in Year 11 who were told to leave their school because they were underachieving. We also lose several kids with genuine academic or sporting talent to elite schools - one boy was offered a scholarship which he didn't even apply for (he took it anyway). This swap of students is what gives a school its reputation and parents, wanting the best quality of education for their child, often gravitate to these pseudo-reputations.
It's all very easy to say this now while I'm on my high horse, but I used to feel as if my school was bad as well. I was determined to get out of my 'hell hole' by the end of Year 7. I told my parents in no uncertain terms that I wanted to sit the Melbourne High exam, so they got me heaps of tutors to help me out. As the exam was approaching, however, I began to have second thoughts about how I felt about my school. It had all the services and facilities that any student would ever need - it was only its 'reputation' that was bothering me. I sat the exam anyway and I was still over the moon when I got the email of acceptance, but after a lengthy period of thought, both my parents and I agreed that it would be best for me to stay at my current school. Could it have been one of the stupidest decisions ever? Potentially. But I don't regret it one little bit. Because I want to show my cohort and the future students who walk past the gates of my high school that reputation doesn't matter. If you want to succeed, you will succeed no matter where you go.
Why do schools feel the need to obtain VCE success by taking talent away from other places, rather than honestly educate their students to the supposed high standard of education they boast to offer? And why are parents so eager to follow these trends? If schools did not 'swap' their students around, we would clearly see a far more level playing field.
Try this question now (read above for my stance on scholarships).
-
try to get a scholarship to a private school.....
all of the top tier schools offer scholarships
hmm, that's a good point actually, but even after scholarships, private schools do get expensive, in terms of just uniform and other costs as well, not to mention transport if you live far away. Transport time and costs was one of the reasons why I decided not to go to MHS.
Pretty sure the main reason is because there are no females at MHS...
we have second hand uniform shops that are as cheap as public school's uniforms.
Same here, I'm pretty sure you can get a full uniform set (blazer, socks, plants, a few shirts, etc.) 2nd hand for ~$250. That's a minor issue paul.
-
Public, private, elite and what not.. I think they all have their advantages and disadvantages.
Coming from a state school (which Mao could agree :P), the only problem for me academically, was the learning environment. The cohort in general had a weaker passion to learn/achieve, and as such, would often become rather disruptive through classes. Coupled with the lack of resources and the setbacks it had to capable teachers (dealing with class problems,etc), learning became quite difficult. However, with a goal in mind, I was able to work independently with the likes of VCE Notes becoming life savers (with resources, community, etc). From my perspective, the only compromise of my public school was academically, where the school developed their students well, socially speaking.
I believe most schools can support you properly when academics aren't the full concern. Even then, it is possible to do 'well' at any school as long as you have the right mindset, goals and values. :P
The system can never truly be fair, if you want something to be in your favor, you work for it. :)
-
try to get a scholarship to a private school.....
all of the top tier schools offer scholarships
hmm, that's a good point actually, but even after scholarships, private schools do get expensive, in terms of just uniform and other costs as well, not to mention transport if you live far away. Transport time and costs was one of the reasons why I decided not to go to MHS.
Pretty sure the main reason is because there are no females at MHS...
we have second hand uniform shops that are as cheap as public school's uniforms.
Same here, I'm pretty sure you can get a full uniform set (blazer, socks, plants, a few shirts, etc.) 2nd hand for ~$250. That's a minor issue paul.
god damn I only spent $150 on brand new pants, polo-shirts and a jumper which lasted me from year 7 till 12, private school is so damn expensive >.<
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
Pretty sure the main reason is because there are no females at MHS...
yes, that was also a very major issue! :P
god damn I only spent $150 on brand new pants, polo-shirts and a jumper which lasted me from year 7 till 12, private school is so damn expensive >.<
same here, except i had a shirt instead of a polo and I had to get new shirts in year 11 cause I grew too much and then the Year 12 jumper, all in all, probably around $250 all brand new :P
I believe most schools can support you properly when academics aren't the full concern. Even then, it is possible to do 'well' at any school as long as you have the right mindset, goals and values. :P
agreed :D
Try this question now (read above for my stance on scholarships).
like I've said before, sometimes parents think that a private school education will be beneficial for their child, hence they move their children around, but they do not realise that they are missing some key ingredients (I've talked about this) - also, I doubt parents who send their kids to private schools think about the general student population, even we didn't think of that back when we were in Year 10 (or the like), it's only really once it's done and dusted that we begin to consider the "playing field"
Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience
-
Why do schools feel the need to obtain VCE success by taking talent away from other places, rather than honestly educate their students to the supposed high standard of education they boast to offer? And why are parents so eager to follow these trends? If schools did not 'swap' their students around, we would clearly see a far more level playing field.
Try this question now (read above for my stance on scholarships).
Well firstly not all scholarships are academic - there's music, sport and financial hardship as well.
Secondly, some people are just not academically-minded, and no amount of top-quality teaching will change that.
Thirdly, if you read the posts from private school students above, there are a vast number of advantages to going to a private school beyond academic education. Parents take these scholarships because they want their children to be exposed to that kind of learning environment.
Fourthly, and this is at Paul, again you completely miss the point. No matter how much time my parents spend with me they're not going to be able to conjure up an orchestra to accompany me in concerts at Hamer Hall, or give me the opportunity to play the massive organ there, or make it possible for me to visit China for 5 weeks in year 9. Sure parental attention is important but you're being very single-minded here.
-
I would go further than that, I think he's being a naive fool
-
Going to a private school over public school has many advantages long after school is finished.
There is an old adage that goes along the lines of Melbourne is run by "jews and old boys." The old collegians associations at private schools like scotch, mgs, skc, cgs etc. are extensive and tit-knit, allowing for graduate students to obtain jobs in the upper echelons of society through such connections - a serious advantage in this competitive world.
Plus, there is a general bias for employers (i.e. offering part time jobs) to 18 and 19 yr olds who have graduated from a top tier private school, as there is the general belief that they have been taught certain societal values that reflect professionalism, moral conduct etc., compared to state school kids who are seen as lacking such skill sets - this is just the generalization that exists, not my opinion, the reality is that it varies from student to student. The main difference is that private school environments are generally more inclined and proactive to foster such cultures, whilst generally, state schools don't.
There is more to life than just academics, which is what is taught at these top schools, this is ultimately a significant separator between public and private schools imo.
-
Well firstly not all scholarships are academic - there's music, sport and financial hardship as well.
Secondly, some people are just not academically-minded, and no amount of top-quality teaching will change that.
Thirdly, if you read the posts from private school students above, there are a vast number of advantages to going to a private school beyond academic education. Parents take these scholarships because they want their children to be exposed to that kind of learning environment.
Firstly, I'd just like to add, from now on, this is for the sake of a debate, because I believe that I have many points for public schools in general and I'm not being ignorant.
Well to your 2nd point, I'm really interested in why some people aren't academically minded, maybe someone who knows about psychology can help out here, but I've always thought that those who value the importance and the quality of education will always strive to achieve good marks. I understand that 99.00+ might require "academic minds" but surely there are subjects out there to suit everyone, art-y, music-y, english-y, humanities-y, maths-y, science-y...etc. I think if someone isn't achieving their fully potential, they either aren't giving it their all or have picked subjects which they're not naturally good at and interested in. If you took me and put me in a Studio Arts subject, I assure you, I will get below 30, but I've gotten 40s in other subjects, because those areas are my strengths, whereas Art isn't.
Your third point, I understand that, but I play sports (swimming), music (contemporary guitar). I've volunteered in the community, taken part in charity programs, been involved in tutoring underprivileged kids as well as having (what I consider) a balanced and healthy social life as well. None of that has anything to do with my school and I've had plenty of opportunities to pursue these interests outside of school.
Fourthly, and this is at Paul, again you completely miss the point. No matter how much time my parents spend with me they're not going to be able to conjure up an orchestra to accompany me in concerts at Hamer Hall, or give me the opportunity to play the massive organ there, or make it possible for me to visit China for 5 weeks in year 9. Sure parental attention is important but you're being very single-minded here.
I can honestly say that without parental influence, assistance and attention, I would not have developed in interest in Maths and Sciences. I would also not have become a balanced person, academically. I have, through them, also developed an interest in the Arts, in History, for example. Without parental attention, I would not have been encouraged to take part in Maths competitions from a young age, which has motivated me to perform better in maths. Without the influence of my family, I would not have gone into high school academically confident across a wide range of subjects. Although I have become independent over the past few years, I can't deny that they have instilled the value of education within me. I don't think any school could have done it better than them. They spent time with me, every night, to teach me not only academics, but how to think and how to learn, how to be critical and how to develop interests. Without them buying biographies of famous scientists and mathematicians, I would have never been inspired so strongly. Had my dad decided to work a few more hours every day to send me to a private school, I would have never had the opportunity to develop in the way that I have, no school can shape a child the way their parents can shape them. :(
They have also successfully trained me to become a moral person, they have discussed societal values with me as well.
-
sorry this is a bit late, but:
DON"T BAG XAVIER!!!
A few rotten eggs killed the school's reputation, but I know the smart kids there are really really hardworking. The co-curricular activities are great, and the school holds the Maytime fair where it donates a lot of money to Jesuit missions in poor countries. it's a really good school, but it's a shame some rich kids are just too spoilt. >:(
Anyway, according to my careers councillor, employers look at the school you go to, and really are biased.(I think someone said this somwhere) All my friends found jobs in about 2 weeks, compared to my public-school going friends, who still havn't found jobs yet. :(
What a cruel world we live in.
s.
-
Fourthly, and this is at Paul, again you completely miss the point. No matter how much time my parents spend with me they're not going to be able to conjure up an orchestra to accompany me in concerts at Hamer Hall, or give me the opportunity to play the massive organ there, or make it possible for me to visit China for 5 weeks in year 9. Sure parental attention is important but you're being very single-minded here.
I can honestly say that without parental influence, assistance and attention, I would not have developed in interest in Maths and Sciences. I would also not have become a balanced person, academically. I have, through them, also developed an interest in the Arts, in History, for example. Without parental attention, I would not have been encouraged to take part in Maths competitions from a young age, which has motivated me to perform better in maths. Without the influence of my family, I would not have gone into high school academically confident across a wide range of subjects. Although I have become independent over the past few years, I can't deny that they have instilled the value of education within me. I don't think any school could have done it better than them. They spent time with me, every night, to teach me not only academics, but how to think and how to learn, how to be critical and how to develop interests. Without them buying biographies of famous scientists and mathematicians, I would have never been inspired so strongly. Had my dad decided to work a few more hours every day to send me to a private school, I would have never had the opportunity to develop in the way that I have, no school can shape a child the way their parents can shape them. :(
They have also successfully trained me to become a moral person, they have discussed societal values with me as well.
Nina: -valid point-
Paulsterio: -irrelevant answer which confirms valid point-
Now I remember why I give up on most VN arguments.
-
I can honestly say that without parental influence, assistance and attention, I would not have developed in interest in Maths and Sciences. I would also not have become a balanced person, academically. I have, through them, also developed an interest in the Arts, in History, for example. Without parental attention, I would not have been encouraged to take part in Maths competitions from a young age, which has motivated me to perform better in maths. Without the influence of my family, I would not have gone into high school academically confident across a wide range of subjects. Although I have become independent over the past few years, I can't deny that they have instilled the value of education within me. I don't think any school could have done it better than them. They spent time with me, every night, to teach me not only academics, but how to think and how to learn, how to be critical and how to develop interests. Without them buying biographies of famous scientists and mathematicians, I would have never been inspired so strongly. Had my dad decided to work a few more hours every day to send me to a private school, I would have never had the opportunity to develop in the way that I have, no school can shape a child the way their parents can shape them. :(
They have also successfully trained me to become a moral person, they have discussed societal values with me as well.
My parents did that too, while sending me to a private school. It's called being a good parent. What's your point again?
-
What about when you don't have people pushing you anymore. The smartest of people will have the ability to self-motivate.